W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > October 2011

Re: Amazon Silk

From: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 00:42:49 +0200
Cc: "Yves Lafon" <ylafon@w3.org>, "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net>, "tag" <www-tag@w3.org>
Message-Id: <34C974BB-1F79-4E4B-8A1A-26B99718BAAC@berjon.com>
To: "Appelquist, Daniel, VF-Group" <Daniel.Appelquist@vodafone.com>
On Oct 4, 2011, at 23:41 , Appelquist, Daniel, VF-Group wrote:
> But to the general point of do we care about "split browsers" like Silk and
> Mini for the purposes of the "linking" document: my view (discussed and
> provisionally agreed with Jeni today) is that Web Architecture should treat
> these as a single user agent since they are tightly coupled. This was the
> logic we used when putting Opera Mini and things like it out of scope in the
> Transforming Proxies best practices document in the Mobile Web Best
> Practices WG.

That's certainly true as things stand. I think the question that it opens up the question of whether there could be value in loosening that coupling by defining what happens in the last step. I haven't made up my mind yet  I'm merely asking.

>>>> In an alternate Universe, the W3C would have more control over the
>>>> brand that is "the Web" (e.g., with a certification program, which is a
>>>> notoriously difficult place for a standards body to go). I'm not sure
>>>> if it would be a better or worse universe.
>>> I honestly can't think of a single case in which such an approach
>>> actually went well; but maybe it's just because we only hear of the
>>> failures.
> I dunno - Wifi Alliance? USB? UNIX?
> ...just sayin'...

Hardware follows a different dynamic, but I'll take UNIX! Any more recent example? I was mostly thinking of projects like OMA's attempt to define what "mobile" was.

Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Tuesday, 4 October 2011 22:43:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:33:12 UTC